Quantcast
Channel: Proxmox Support Forum
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 170660

SAS / SATA - Which to choose?

$
0
0
We are just testing some new HP DL380 G8 machines (32 GB RAM, Smart Array Gen8 Controller with RAID10, 2 CPU's with 8 Cores each + HyperThreading, Proxmox 3). The first server has 4x 1 TB SATA drives in RAID10:

Code:

CPU BOGOMIPS:      127684.80
REGEX/SECOND:      1323724
HD SIZE:          94.49 GB (/dev/mapper/pve-root)
BUFFERED READS:    401.60 MB/sec
AVERAGE SEEK TIME: 7.00 ms
FSYNCS/SECOND:    4475.75
DNS EXT:          43.03 ms
DNS INT:          39.48 ms

The second one has 8x 300 GB SAS drives in RAID10:

Code:

CPU BOGOMIPS:      127680.00
REGEX/SECOND:      1207380
HD SIZE:          94.49 GB (/dev/mapper/pve-root)
BUFFERED READS:    985.61 MB/sec
AVERAGE SEEK TIME: 3.74 ms
FSYNCS/SECOND:    3425.66
DNS EXT:          37.97 ms
DNS INT:          41.70 ms

As you can see, the SATA drives have a better FSYNC-Value compared to the SAS drives, but lower buffered reads. So which configuration would you choose if you want to run VM's with Debian Linux (KVM, RAW-Files, no VIRTIO for network or storage), used as Webservers (LAMP) with many simultaneous requests? Alternatively, we could also place the storage on external (NFS-) Servers, but I guess that the performance with a Gigabit link will not be good enough. Are there any improvements with Proxmox 3 in terms of cluster storage (Ceph, Sheepdog, ...) ?

We also run some openVZ systems - as far as I know, these can only be stored localy or on NFS storage, right?

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 170660

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>